William Shakespeare demonstrates tyrannical themes throughout several of his plays. However, in both drama’s, The Tragedy of King Richard the Third and The Tragedy of Macbeth, the representation of tyranny as a character clearly manifests. Accordingly, Shakespeare makes use of the tyrannical character to propose the idea of true evil in an innocent society. Though, there is a noticeable difference in the logic of the tyrant between the two plays; Richard, portraying a type of intentional evil, committing crimes for the sheer pleasure of it, whereas Lady Macbeth does not appear to have a reason, as if her evil is unintentional.
Since Richard’s character reveals the malicious intent that lies within him at the very start of the drama, the play’s
…show more content…
The Duke of Gloucester makes it clear, frequently, that his intent is purely evil, “I am determined to prove a villain,” thus reaffirming his pleasure of being wicked and not needing any motives to be so (1.1.30). In the book, Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, critique Waldo F. McNeir asserts that Richard’s persona of naïveté is not well disguised, in his article, “The Masks of Richard the Third.” Similarly, McNeir believes that the people who are skeptical of him buy into his hypocrisy because they share common enemies. In any case, Richard “dupes people who, for the most part, willingly play the parts he assigns them, and who therefore deserve the consequences…We are caught off guard as we are drawn into Richard’s plots. We know his game because he has told us about it” (173). To McNeir, Richard’s lack of conscience, which in this case can be viewed as deceiving or tricking the same people he once inflicted pain upon, puts the reader “in the position of being able to say ‘I could have told you so’” (173). Ultimately, Richard’s immoral behavior should come as no surprise to the reader given that he verifies how evil he truly is. However, this ability to trick the same character repeatedly demonstrates the emotional disconnect he has with people (not feeling anything towards …show more content…
She uses God as a representation of Richmond, a member of the Lancaster royal family who later challenges Richard for the throne, since she knows that God defeats Satan, light destroys darkness, this is her way of establishing that Richard tyranny can end. Thus, her language towards her son, wishing for his defeat, therefore reflects how he views himself. In other words, the Duchess’ (seeing through his persona of the innocent bystander) hatred for her son has created an individual who hates himself, who embodies the hatred of other
Moreover, Richard’s multifaceted nature in his determination to attain power is further accentuated through the striking metaphor “And thus I clothe my naked villainy …And seem a saint, when most I play the devil.”, which Shakespeare employs to represent Richard as an embodiment of absolute evil and amorality. Hence, the Shakespearean audience becomes aware of the destruction of Richard’s moral compass as he sacrifices the value of honesty in his ambitious plan to gain power and engage in sacrilegious acts to create his own fate. Comparatively, Pacino reshapes the downfall of Richard as a result of his ambition for power to reflect the secular perspective of free will and aspiration. As such, Pacino’s reimagining of the opening soliloquy with a mid shot of Pacino leaning over the sick King Edward effectively encapsulates the control Richard possesses, which allows him to deceive the king and maneuver his way
His mother says … Shame serves thy life and doth thy death attend… (Act IV, Scene 4, l.2986); even though she is his mother, she sees what Richard has done and does not approve of it. She is a character that reminds Richard that he is constantly wrong and he came … on earth to make the earth my hell… (Act IV, Scene 4, l.15). She has very strong feelings of revenge towards Richard, like most of the females in the play, but is powerless in front of him.
Since Richard cannot do anything about his deformity and ugliness he turns his bitterness to ambition and lays the groundwork for his plan to betray King Edward IV. Richard tells the audience, “plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams, to set my brother Clarence and the King in deadly hate against the other; and if King Edward be as true and just as I am subtle, false, and treacherous, this day should Clarence closely be mewed up, about a prophecy, which says that G OF Edward’s heirs the murderer shall be” (1.1.32-40). In these lines, Richard reveals his plan that he will turn Clarence and King Edward against each other so Edward will banish Clarence to the tower because he believes Clarence will be his murderer. Richard will do this through declaring a prophecy that this will be so. Richard explains that this will work because King Edward is as just as Richard is treacherous and Richard will use that against King Edward to cause his and Clarence’s demise. It is not known whether the character Richard would have revealed more about his plan this early in the play because he is interrupted by Clarence. Richard ends the speech with the lines, “dive thoughts down to my soul, here Clarence comes” (1.1.41), which basically means that he better keep
A main aspect of Richard’s, Duke of Gloucester, personality is his hatred of women, possibly due to most woman within Richard III holding more knowledge than the men, in regards to Richard’s deceiving nature. The only woman who is outsmarted by Richard is Lady Anne.
Shakespeare’s Richard III, is filled with desires and determination to achieve and fulfill ambition. Shakespeare uses the power of language to explicate Richard’s manipulative ways to fulfill his desires of becoming king, thus doing so by bringing darkness to the content world of others. According to Anderson’s article The Death of a Mind: Study of Shakespeare’s Richard III Richard’s state of mind is oriented around imposing “dark shadows over the positive dispositions of the others’ lives” (Anderson 701); he works at spreading destruction and grievance to those around him. Throughout the play Richard is in his own state of mind, with his main focus on the crown. Act I scene ii, illustrates Richard’s power and manipulative ways through language in order to gain advantage and gain a step forward in achieving the crown. The dialogue between Richard and Lady Anne at King Henry’s funeral exemplifies his manipulation when he uses charming and charismatic words to obtain her attention. Throughout this essay I will agree with Anderson’s point that Richard’s manipulative ploy is a means of fulfilling his ambition. This essay will explicate how Richard manipulates and uses the power of language to exemplify what his deranged state of mind can do to unsuspecting and naive minds. Lady Anne, her character at the beginning of the scene is distressed and angered, however as the scene progresses, Richard’s dialogue with Lady Anne begins to illustrate her naive mind and weak character
This derives from the play as a recount of historical events with a known outcome and a medium for propaganda in support of the monarchy, an avid determinist. Nevertheless, the aforementioned tension is prevalent throughout and epitomised by the paradoxical pun ‘I am determined to prove a villain’. Uttered with a tone of poise and self-assuredness, the term ‘determined’ implies a conscious statement of purpose and a preordained villainy. Thus Richard is aligned with the stock character of the Vice, an instrument of predestination, and the innovative Machiavel, an advocator of humanism. Despite this, the ultimate decline of Richard is consequential of the reign of determinism. The directly antithetic correctio ‘I am a villain. Yet I lie, I am not’ yields an implicit self-doubt and acknowledgment of an inability to fulfil his humanist purpose. Providentialism thus displays precedence over self-determination. This is in direct contrast to Pacino’s docudrama, composed for a secular modern American audience disengaged with traditional notions of determinism. A greatly diminished and altered portrayal of Margaret, the primary instrument of determinism in the play, is expressive of this. Pacino devalues her curses by reducing her to a ‘sort of ghost of the past’. A frenzied montage of informative discourse and the activity of the play complete with
Ambition is an earnest desire for achievement. Both texts are self reflexive and emphasise Richard’s obsessive ambition, desire and longing for the throne. Each Richard strives towards capturing the throne regardless of consequences and bloodshed. Richard is depicted in both texts as an ambitious character who strives to gain power and independence through deception and self confessed villainy. ‘Since I cannot prove a lover. . . I am determined to prove a villain’ This obsession which drives Richard to commit horrific evils to gain and then protect his claim to the throne. His ambition, power and evil blinds him and inevitably is responsible for his downfall in both of the texts. A connection is formed between Looking for Richard and King Richard III in the final scenes Al Pacino’s interpretation and ‘Hollywood’ background influences an ending which can be interpreted as portraying Richmond as a coward. Elizabethan audiences
Richard then gloats over his success in a soliloquy stating how he has won her heart even though he is regarded by her as the devil with dissembling looks and he stabbed Edward her love just 3 months earlier. This highlights how he thinks of himself as the best as he brags about his misdeeds as though he is immortal.
Richard constant use of manipulating characters around him to get what he wants is majestic and beautiful with his play on words. Ultimately, manipulation is the key to Richard success and he does it so well that he manipulates the audience. As he allows the audience to enter into the play by learning the secret details of his plots he creates the audience to be involved in the wrong doings as Richard takes us on the journey. The ways Richard uses his manipulation skills makes the play as though the audience is a part of it and creates the audience to be on his side for the majority of the
He is arrogant no less, on the strength of his superiority to any natural stirrings of love or pity, of terror or remorse. Richard’s true fall and punishment is his humiliation on his point of reliance and pride; he comes to require friends when friends fail in heart or in heartiness, he regrets affection, would fain be pitied, admits terror, and believes in the power of conscience if he endeavors to defy it. The involuntary forces of his being rise in insurrection against the oppression of the voluntary. His human nature vindicates the tendencies of humanity, when the organism, which was strained to sustain itself on the principle of renunciation of sympathy, falters and breaks down. The power of the strongest will have its limitations; mere defiance will not free the mind from superstition, and mere brutality cannot absolutely close up the welling springs of
Richard’s aspiration for power caused him to sacrifice his morals and loyalties in order to gain the throne of England. Shakespeare refers to the political instability of England, which is evident through the War of the Roses between the Yorks and Lancastrians fighting for the right to rule. In order to educate and entertain the audience of the instability of politics, Shakespeare poses Richard as a caricature of the Vice who is willing to do anything to get what he wants. As a result, the plans Richard executed were unethical, but done with pride and cunningness. Additionally, his physically crippled figure that was, “so lamely and unfashionable, that dogs bark at me as I halt by them,” reflects the deformity and corruption of his soul. The constant fauna imagery of Richard as the boar reflected his greedy nature and emphasises that he has lost his sense of humanity.
While both Macbeth and Richard III are characterized by bloody ambitious tragic arcs, Richard’s motivation comes from an inherent evil whereas Macbeth is inherently plagued by self-doubt. For Richard, his soliloquy after he awakens from his nightmare of torment by a parade of his victim’s ghosts is a rare glimpse of internal conflict in the Machiavellian king. He questions, “What do I fear? myself? There’s none else by” (5.5.136). He alternates between defending and questioning himself.
The focus of The Tragedy of King Richard the Second is shaped by Shakespeare’s affirmative bias of Henry. Throughout the play, Shakespeare excludes and alters parts of England’s history and employs double meanings of words, which ultimately leads the reader to side with Henry. Shakespeare subtly rewrites history and uses cunning word choice throughout The Tragedy of King Richard the Second to paint Henry in a favorable light despite the fact that Henry violated the Divine Right of Kings by usurping the throne from King Richard.
Shakespeare constructs Richard as a complex, unique and villainous character. From his physical deformity, through to his twisted personality and articulate skills, Shakespeare creates a unique and very intelligent character that both enthrals us, yet horrifies us at the same time. In scene two through his construction of Richard’s language, gestures, emotions, and interactions, Shakespeare successfully shows us the complex nature of Richards’s character, and the deeply psychological personality that accompanies it. Scene 2 takes place during the burial service of Lady Anne’s husband and father in law (both of whom Richard murdered). It starts with Lady Anne mourning her loved ones and cursing Richard for bringing death upon them “O, cursed be the hand that made these holes/ cursed the heart that had the heart to do it/Cursed the blood that let this blood from hence”.